Personality conflict?

I read the letters concerning the proposed school board changes with great interest. I have wondered since this issue arose: "What is the agenda of those parties wishing to make this change?" After reading the letter from Ms. Wessel, it is apparent that this is a personality conflict and has nothing to do with making the community better. Her letter detailed alleged incompetencies of current board members and questioned the quality of the rural representatives.

The current system of elected representation is not the problem. If indeed there are problems with the current personalities on the board, better candidates can be recruited from the current districts. Don't take away our right to send our neighbors to the board to speak for us. With an at-large system, it seems that there's a danger of stacking the board in favor of locations or agendas.

I concede to Ms. Wessel that many of us do not attend the meetings of the school board. However, with small children in our homes, we are needed at 7:30-8 p.m. to give baths

and read bedtime stories. I understand that those individuals with older children are not involved in these nightly activities anymore. Because I am not attending board meetings does not make my voice any less relevant. I've never attended a congressional session either, but I don't think that means I should lose my representation in that house.

All citizens deserve to have a representative voice on the school board. To change the system is not only reactionary, but also is divisive and irresponsible. It will only serve to vindicate those individuals with personality issues with current board members. Those of us who have our children in Baldwin schools will not be served by an at-large system of representation. I hope responsible citizens will refuse to sign these petitions, and help to retain our community voice on the school board.